U.S. Institute of Peace lays off most staff members

All but a small group of U.S. Institute of Peace employees received formal termination notices Friday evening, effective immediately, individuals familiar told NBC News.

This ends the employment of almost everyone at the USIP building on Constitution Avenue in Washington, D.C. The employees who remain active may include senior officials who are expected to help shutter offices overseas, as well as some human resources officials, all of whom are expected to be ultimately terminated.

The move comes just weeks after U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell chastised members of the Department of Government Efficiency, which is led by tech mogul Elon Musk, for how it forcefully entered the USIP building with armed law enforcement officers earlier this month.

Howell’s comments came as she denied representatives of USIP a temporary restraining order against the Trump administration after several USIP staffers sued to stop DOGE from dismantling the group and to reinstate leaders in the organization who were removed and replaced.

In her denial of a TRO earlier this month, Howell noted that USIP is a “very complicated entity” because it is not a federal agency but rather a nonprofit organization funded by Congress.

“I am very offended by how DOGE has operated at the institute and treated American citizens trying to do a job that they were statutorily tasked to do,” Howell said. “But that concern about how this has gone down is not one that can sway me in the factors of a TRO.”

The lawsuit also sought to reinstate USIP’s former board members, whom President Donald Trump replaced with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and others ahead of DOGE’s attempted takeover of the agency.

Part of the government’s argument against this lawsuit was that the plaintiffs did not have standing to sue, given that they were removed from USIP’s board and from leadership positions in the organization and replaced.

“The former acting president [of USIP], Mr. George E. Moose, no longer has any authority to [file a lawsuit]. Whether Moose’s removal was proper, or not, is not at issue in this suit as Moose is not a party, and no plaintiff purports to assert claims based on supposed injuries to him,” the government wrote in its argument against a TRO.